Patna High Court
Smt. Niru Kumari alias Niru DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition is not maintainable as the appropriate remedy is to approach the Collector/Additional Collector, and the writ petition is therefore disposed.
Summary
Petitioners Smt. Niru Kumari and Smt. Shobha Kumari challenged an order dated 08-12-2025 passed by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms (DCLR), Paliganj, which rejected their claim that their Bakast land was raiyati land. They sought quashing of the order and direction to consider their case in accordance with a circular dated 11-11-2014 that purportedly declared such lands as raiyati. The State counsel argued that the petitioners should have approached the Collector or Additional Collector before filing a writ petition. The Court held that a writ petition challenging a revenue authority’s order must be filed before the superior authority and, after hearing, a reasoned order is required. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without granting the reliefs sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition challenging the DCLR's order is maintainable before the High Court
- Whether the order of the DCLR dated 08-12-2025 should be quashed
- Whether the circular dated 11-11-2014 mandates the land to be declared raiyati
Subjects
- writ jurisdiction
- land reforms
- rai yati land
- revenue authority
- circular 11-11-2014
- jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6010 of 2026
======================================================
1. Smt. Niru Kumari alias Niru Devi Wife of Sri Amrendra Kumar Resident of
Village and P.O.- Patoot, P.S.- Rani Talab (Kanpa), District- Patna, Bihar.
2. Smt. Shobha Kumari, Wife of Sri Ramendra Kumar Resident of Village and
P.O.- Patoot, P.S.- Rani Talab (Kanpa), District- Patna, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue and
Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna.
3. The Collector, Patna, District- Patna.
4. The Additional Collector, Patna Sadar, Patna.
5. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Paliganj, Patna (hereinafter referred to
as DCLR).
6. The Circle Officer, Bikram, District- Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel 4
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 04-05-2026 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioners and the State.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief(s):
“(a) For quashing and setting aside the
order dated 08.12.2025 passed by the Deputy
Collector, Land Reforms, (hereinafter referred to as
DCLR) Paliganj, Patna in Bakast Raiyati Case No.
06/2025-26, by which the learned DCLR, Paliganj,
Patna High Court CWJC No.6010 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
2/3
Patna has rejected the case of the petitioners for
declaring the Bakast land of the petitioners as
raiyati land.
(b) For directing the respondent
authorities to consider the case of the petitioners in
light of the circular dated 11.11.2014 and
thereafter declaring the land of the petitioners as
raiyati land, as per the instruction given in the said
circular dated 11.11.2014.
(c) For any other relief or reliefs which
Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated
08.12.2025 passed by the DCLR, Paliganj, Patna in Case No.
06/2025-26.
4. Learned State counsel, at the outset, submits that
against the said order, the petitioners ought to have moved
before the Collector/Additional Collector, Patna.
5. After some arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioners submit that they are ready to approach the concerned
respondent but the matter be heard on merit.
6. This Court is of the opinion that when a petition is
Patna High Court CWJC No.6010 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
3/3
preferred challenging the order passed by any revenue authority
before a superior authority, it has to be considered and after
noticing/hearing the parties, a reasoned order is mandatory.
7. The writ petition stands disposed of with the
aforesaid observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U
Checking your session…